Discussion in 'Total War' started by -0blivion-, Nov 13, 2006.
Well well, for once the Europeans get a game before we do here in North America! Congrats all, MTW2 sounds like fun.
I'll have to get it and then either buy a new desktop (as my current one is too ancient to upgrade) or a new laptop (as my current one is too weak to play this game and you just can't simply upgrade a laptop). Oh wait, PS3 is coming out this week too. Decisions decisions
Just got it...its amazing. HRE is really good, I powerlined through Italy yesterday
I'm sure it would be a blast provided I had the computer capacity to run this, or moreover, the money to buy this.
Played my game as Scotland, this time I was glad to see that the Mongols did not get as far as they did in my first game (this time Constantinople did not fall) and helped out France against the Portugese, as they felt like having a Hundred Years War instead of England. Crazy French.
I'm thinking Byzantine next
Mongols get far? how far?
In my game as England, they conquered the Middle East, Egypt, Asia Minor and were fighting in the Balkans, in the Scotland game they were held off a little more, but still took a fair chunk of the Middle East and Asia Minor. I believe they are supposed to be countered later on by the Timurid invasion, but I've never really seen them do much other than establishing a base somewhere.
Two games isn't really enough for a definite opinion though, and I haven't played an empire in eastern Europe yet, let alone one that has to fight the invasions.
I've been playing for about a week now. First impressions were awesome, and the Scots are by far the best looking armies (there's no Ireland so I play as our Gaelic cousins).
However, like most modern games shortly after release it needs a patch. Shooting morons in the back and having cavalry just do what they feel like gets old quick and there's some serious bugs in assaults. The patch should fix all this up, but what is really annoying is the lack of diplomacy options, the seemingly random inquisitions and allies backstabbing you out of the blue.
Dont get me wrong, its better than Rome and by far the best looking strategy game around. Its just all the bugs and little things that annoyed me in Rome are still here, large as life. All the effort put into the graphics is wonderfull I just wish a little more had been done with the Diplomacy and AI. I know we cant get a computer to play like a human, but GalCiv2 has wonderfull AI, surely CA can do better than this.
I don't want to put people off. It looks amazing and the Mongols are suitable terrifying, but it just papered over the same cracks that were there in Rome and I cant honestly say its the best game ever (and believe me I wanted to).
It is a great game, but with the hype I admit to being a little let down.
(ps anyone else notice that the Scottish General yells "ach lads, its no good, run for it" when you WIN? I laughed out loud after one particular battle where we captured the Egyptian Sultan, destroyed his army and suffered very minor casualties. The punchline, my characters name was David the Mad in this battle. He also yells "galloots we've walked into an ambush" when I go to assault a castle.)
yes i noticed that...
I’m 142 turns into my first game hard/hard playing as Spain, of course !
I’ve had to buy an Nvidia 7900 GT at 309 Euros to play it well at an acceptable FRPS of 15-17.
The game is superb. I would only criticize the following, having to do with the prominent persons:
1.- Inquisitors.- they are way to overpowered. These mean beasts killed my best 4 generals in only five turns including my king, leaving only two useless family members which were only good as cannon fodder. They kill everything: merchants, priests, generals …you name it. They really have to be toned down IMHO. You find yourself hiding your best general in a desert for twenty turns so as to avoid these guys. They are far too vicious.
2.- Assassins.- they just don’t kill nor do they sabotage. In 142 turns I’ve built like 12 of them and not one has managed to succeed in ANY task. Even sabotaging city’s improvements they failed miserably. This is not normal and it’s a fun-killer. Granted they survived many missions but only to fail in the next.
Again the success chances seem to be lower than in RTW and I think they ought to be tweaked so as to give them a 33% success chance when they are noob assassins against an easy target such as a rebel captain instead of the current 16%. Assassins in M2TW are all but useless now IMHO.
Their success rate against another prominent person (princess, priest, merchant, inquisitor) is also far too low (approx 8%) and ought to be adjusted IMHO to 15% at least. I hope this is changed in a patch.
3.- Merchants.- there success chance against another merchant is also way too low, being around 8% at times. This is just ridiculously low. I think this should also be tweaked.
The rest of the game is superb. The battles are awesome and the weather effects and battlefields are just plain beautiful. An excellent game all-around.
It's not so much they're vicious, it's more that they completely strike randomly and without warning. This may be true historically, but in game terms, it's just annoying. I know I'm going to complain about my general who got killed - despite leading the crusade for Jerusalem - a lot, but at the same time it wasn't just him, it was anyone within range of an inquisitor, no matter how powerful my relations with the Papal states were.
That said, just to annoy your second point, my assassins had a helluva good time taking out any inquisitor that entered British lands
Very enjoyable. After I started as the Byzantines, that is... I started out as Venice and I was fighting an easy battle. I told all my men to attack the two-three barb units in the middle of the city. I go away to get some food and find my king dead. Apparently, my men backed off and decided it would be fun to watch my king duel a hundred men. So I quit and started as the Byzantines (altered the locked-unlocked). Now I'm doing well.
I never played Medieval so I just started out very cautiously. After realizing that, for now, there's no major changes, I set out to capture the barb cities near me, allied with the Hungarians, and captured Turkey, thus destroying the Turks. But I was amazed to see that the Turks only had two cities. I checked and nearly the entire East is just barbs. That's not much fun... I was hoping that there'd be mass hordes of rich, powerful Muslims knocking on Europe's door. Oh well.
BTW-I'm on turn 19 now. I've still got a LONG way to go till I can beat up those Aztecs.
Another note: I love the ransoming idea. I attacked the Turks and blitzkrieged their cities. Thankfully, I captured their Sultan alone in a plains and I captured him. Unfortunately they refused to pay the ransom and I had to kill him but still... Really neat idea. It actually makes some point to capturing generals. I used to just ignore them because they'd always have some stupid successor. Well, back to the game (just got it a couple of hours ago).
I haven't been able to play it yet (brother's hogging his computer, the only good one in the house) but it sure does look amazing. My favourite part is the voices you hear when you hold the mouse over the Ransom/Release/Execute buttons.
Give it a few more decades, you'll have all the invaders you could care to handle
Playing as Venice and just captured Constantinople. Before I took the city the Turks launched a jihad against it so I just had to fight off a large Turkish army and an Egyptian army might be arriving soon. Was my biggest battle so far and my most successful as we killed 900 troops losing about 100. Mainly because they had very few archers whilst I had 5 groups and two catapults which heavily demorilised the enemy.
Constantinople is a nice city to loot btw.
Bizarrely the Hungarians broke our alliance and started attacking me with very small armies that were easily wiped out. I'm heavily fortifying Venice since
Now its about turn 30 (I'm the Byzantines) and I've defeated Venice and Hungary now. Venice attacked me and Hungary broke my alliance and sided with them. I crushed them easily but had to bring in my Eastern armies. Now I'm building up t take on Siciliy/Milan and have an army takign the North Caspian barbs, another takign the south caspian barbs, and a large force headed by my emperor that is taking the Middle East barbs. Soon I'll get into Egyptian teritory and i'll decide then whether or not to attack.
BTW-I've captured 2 faction leaders but have gotten no ransoms. Stingy people
Playing as Byzantine now, dreading the Mongol invasions, but so far have a pretty powerful empire. I was expecting a hard time in the beginning, but it generates a lot of money for itself.
Venice and Hungary don't seem to like that though, but they were no bother - did a loud march towards Venice, destroying any city in my way and am content patrolling the Hungarian border for anyone who dares to annoy me. For good measure I declared war on the Turks and took their capital in an embarrassingly easy fight. Is it my fault the first catapult shot hit the general head on? No, so give me a decent fight!
Just decimated 800 German troops by initially using my siege equipment and archers and then using the tower walls to further weaken them. The next battle was similar in Constantinople where the Egyptians started marching up and down the walls and eventually lost half their army (1000 out of 2000).
I'm currently at war with every neighbour (Sicily, Milan, HRE, Hungary, Byzantium) plus the Egyptians and Turks who are probably in a never ending Jihad. Should I let them take Constantinople and then retake it?
How are you finding the game itself Dell? I always liked your insights into Rome, and it would be interesting to see how you feel this game has added to the Total War series
Just started another Scotland game, managed to take Englands island territories in 10 turns (?, possibly less) in.
Separate names with a comma.